Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollerstud98
|
Here is a link to the original CBC article:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...suit-1.5018766
This is a great example of risks associated with purchasing a condo, because there are extra layers between the new unit owner and the developer / builder, as well as and renovator / service provider.
Quote:
Leaky roofs, windows and walls and defective balconies — all symptoms of the shoddy construction of four condominium buildings in northwest Calgary, according to a civil lawsuit filed in Alberta Court of Queen's Bench.
|
This above part is pretty standard fair. It is extremely common with condos, but now the issue is what will happen about it.
Quote:
The people who bought the 288 units at the Panorama West project are facing massive bills. And they've been told to keep quiet by the people whose job it is to protect them: their condo board and their lawyer. They were told in writing that speaking out could jeopardize any potential settlement.
|
It is a complex scenario, as given the layers, there will be massive overheads for both lawyers and condo board expenses here. Lawyers have to deal with complex ownership, and will charge for that. They will also have to deal with the complex builder / developer structure.
Quote:
On top of all that, the company many of them thought built the complex isn't named in the $6.5-million lawsuit.
Cardel Homes, the company that marketed the project and the company many thought developed and built it, created a separate company and a limited partnership to oversee construction.
|
While the article suggests this is novel, it is actually quite standard for most developments IE each project gets its own development company spinoff.
Quote:
Testing done last year on the buildings determined that windows, roofs, eavestroughs and downspouts weren't installed or built properly and waterproofing measures were not done correctly, according to an engineering firm hired by the condo corporation.
|
I don't doubt any of what was in the report, but given these buildings are a decade old, I do question the emergency scenario that requires all unit owners to pay thousands of dollars by March 1st. I very much sympathize with the lady quoted in the article, who is required $7,600 as her first installment and will need to use a line of credit to make that payment.
Quote:
It's very common because this is a special purpose where eventually the limited partnership can dissolve once the project is complete. And that would allow the limited partner, which would be typically the operating arm, where there is liquidity, to not be liable in the future
|
This is a major major major issue for condos. This scenario rarely if ever happens with single family homes or even duplexes. My home builder was X and not a shell company. If I have issues, I go after them directly. They will not have made the extra headache to create a shell company, and thus they would have also designed and built properly, knowing I know who they are and where they are.
Quote:
"What's likely stated in the statement of claim is that the general partner has no assets. So even a victory of sorts won't be successful in terms of actually collecting a quantum of compensation because without the partnership and without the limited partner, it's likely the general partner is just a shell and there's nothing to collect on," said Bone.
|
Yup. Good luck is all I can say. It is like recovering your bitcoin after QuadrigaCX went belly up and files were lost, destroyed or whatever.